Slashdot Mirror

Granted, the odds of one of the R candidates supporting somebody named Ahmed Mohamed were already slim. Now that Obama has come out supporting this kid, I will be shocked if any of them to come to his defense. Just look at the comments on a GOP news site. This isn't even the most vitriolic one out there. Mind you, these are the same people who rant when "Obama's" TSA takes their favorite pocket knife, calling it government overreach and unamerican. And here they are saying things like "the dumb kid deserved it," or "maybe he was just testing our defenses for a real bomb." Really?! WTF!? No wonder everybody thinks we're a bunch of racist fucks.

The problem is that he uses fear mongering to push his jingoistic agenda.

That's not something civilized people do, at least not in the United States.

You've been out of the loop for a while. The Republicans wisely got rid of "The Death Tax", and in their enthusiasm to eliminate it, they even voted down a Democrat proposal to keep the estate taxes only on money above and beyond the first billion of net worth.

Thanks to the foresight of our leaders in Washington, we are all safe to pursue the American Dream of working hard, skimming a bit off the top, sticking it to a bunch of pensioners, and ensuring your descendants to the fifth generation never have to do anything productive.

We are entering the fourth quarter, and the last strong job growth was Q2. Looks like the recovery is fading to me. It probably has something to do with $50+/barrel oil.

Bush/Cheney [vs] Kerry/Edwards
What a great choice to make; nuclear war or learning Spanish as a new national language. Hmmmmm, what's that half life again?

I hope you live in a "swing state"! This Google search on Bush's amnesty plan for illegal aliens turns up almost 7,000 hits. From just the top ten hits we have the Washington Times, a top ranked Conservative Christian site, GOP USA, and even FOX News ALL criticizing Bush's plan.

Perhaps you prefer the general Republican platform on immigration to the general Democrat platform on immigration, but in this case Bush is so pro-business that his policy is to protect business's "right to employ illegal aliens" and to encourage businesses to import even more cheap immigrant labor.

Bush refuses to to call it an "amnesty" program. The Whitehouse website attempts to explain it is not an "amnesty" program. However every news story I have seen calls it an amnesty program and immigrants are calling it an amnesty program. And it *has* trigged a surge in Mexicans flooding the border.

I may not be thrilled with people voting for Bush because they agree with him, but that's still a million times better than people being mislead by Bush spin and mistakenly voting for him.

P.S.
This isn't really an issue I care about. I have about a hundred other reasons to want Bush out.

-

I just found this article about the show (which gets off topic at the end but the first bit is related). (I KNOW I KNOW IT'S FROM gopusa.com BUT JUST CLICK IT AND READ)

They must have had a bad brainstorming session or something... shouldn't they have been "interrogating" a government official about, oh, I don't know, all of the same stupid shit that CROSSFIRE and HARDBALL are getting their panties in a bunch about?

That sounds like a fantastic concept for a show, in fact, it's unfortunate they had to blotch it with this shit.

As highlighted by slashdot.org, according to a mailing list posting (mirror):

From: Lauren Weinstein

[...] Subject: Warning to IP Readers: When "The Debate Show" Calls -- Hang Up!

[...] They wanted me to debate a known spammer (who they wouldn't identify at the time) regarding the scourge of spam. It would be fun she implied, since the audience would of course be on my side.

[...] Crossballs is a rigged "reality" show, where real guests, who have been kept in the dark about the show's real format, are paired off against actors (playing the debate opponents) for the amusement of the live audience. The stories I read from persons recently on the show included descriptions of crude, sexually-oriented verbal attacks (and worse, like being handed various sexual "apparatus") and concerns that their reputations would be ruined once the shows aired.

The nature of Crossballs is confirmed by a couple of other sources. According to a gopusa.com commentary:

This show is not "The Debate Show," as advertised and the name they use to procure panelists, but "Crossballs" a newly produced show for Comedy Central, owned by Viacom and MTV networks, and is a spoof of political debate shows that seeks to mock conservatives with actors posing as some of the panelists.

One such real panelist, who thought the show was going to be a serious debate show, was a conservative activist from California who prepared to appear on the show to talk about the 2nd amendment. Jim March, whose account we have attached, is a 2nd amendment activist and was mocked and ridiculed by a "psychologist" who said he had sexual issues and offered him a two month supply of penis enlargement pills if he gave up his guns.

Nowhere in the material for "The Debate Show" and the press releases for the upcoming "Crossballs" do they make the connection, or let you in on the joke that the "actor panelists" debate the real panelists, complete with props and "live feed" video designed to mock and make fun of the real panelists and their conservative views.

And according to a June 15, 2004 story from digitalspy.co.uk, an entertainment newsblog:

Debate shows on US cable news channels such as CNN's Crossfire and MSNBC's Hardball are to be "skewered" by a new Comedy Central show, Crossballs.

The new show will feature comedians posing as experts debating real people who don't realise that the show is a sham.

"Shot in front of a live audience, Crossballs is a smart, comedic spoof of programs such as Crossfire, Hardball with Chris Matthews, and the entire Fox News Network," explains Comedy Central.

The show premieres on Tuesday, July 6 at 7:30pm ET and will air for eight consecutive weeks.

In similar display of mockery, according to a Jun 5, 2004 dc.indymedia.org story:

A small but determined group of about 60 demonstrators displayed their anger and disgust in front of the offices of Arlington defense contractor, CACI last week.

CACI is the firm recently implicated in the report by U.S. Maj. Gen. Antonio M. Taguba. CACI employees "were either directly or indirectly responsible for the abuse at Abu Ghraib," according to the report. Taguba strongly reco

Actually, resolution 1441, the UNSCR which gave the US permission to attack, only said Saddam had to cough up the missing weapons (weapons which had disappeared after he kicked the weapons inspectors out back in '98-'99). The onus wasn't on us to find the weapons, it was on him to produce them, or prove they had been destroyed. He did neither, so we went in to take him out.

Besides, as an anonymous poster pointed out, the article clearly states where we've found actual weapons. Not "starter kits", not "precursors", but actual full blown weapons. Keep ignoring it if you want, but even Sen. Kerry has changed his tune (see this article...the article is published by the GOP, but the quote is from Kerry's recent appearance on Hardball).

The Bush administration caved after relentless negative media coverage that began to hurt the GOP and the administration. Not the BA's finest leadership hour (should have stood up to the libs), but this is off-topic since we are dicussing censorship, not lack of leadership. Compare: How the liberal media has not covered the nearly identical Dodd-Byrd flap. Had you even heard of this? I'll bet most people haven't.

6) Ann Coulter, banned from network interviews while promoting NYT bestseller.

Does Larry King count?

I got a Google for you: Search Al Franken's book vs. Coulter's for reviews and TV interviews, then give me your smug Google-before-posting crap. Coulter was virtually shut-out on the broadcast nets. Not to mention Franken's new lib radio network was covered like the Second Coming.